Latest employment data

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
User avatar
Tiago Splitter
Posts: 15523
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 1:20 am

Re: Latest employment data

Postby Tiago Splitter » Wed Apr 15, 2015 5:21 pm

ChoboPie wrote:You admit that you're a 0L, but then you claim that CCN should be changed to CCNP or CCP? What's your basis for this, besides a cursory glance at one year's worth of BL+FedClerk outcomes?

One year? 2010-2013 BL+FC:

Stanford: 77%
Columbia: 74.5%
Penn: 71.25%
Harvard: 70.25%
Chicago: 67.5%
Cornell: 65.25%
Yale: 64.5%
NYU: 63.25%
Northwestern: 60%
Duke: 59.75%
UVA: 58.25%
Berkeley: 57.75%
Michigan: 52%
GULC: 44.25%

NYU crushes for PI and this understates its placement ability but let's not get carried away.

03152016
Posts: 9189
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 3:14 am

Re: Latest employment data

Postby 03152016 » Wed Apr 15, 2015 5:22 pm

wsag826 wrote:
Brut wrote:
wsag826 wrote:0L here. Do federal clerkship percentages matter on the same level that employment numbers do? Certainly they're prestigious but (i) do these clerkship percentages reflect people who are clerking in the 2016-17 year or beyond but are doing a legal fellowship or another JD job first; and (ii) if it is so hard to secure a federal clerkship in the first place, doesn't it kind of make the fed. clerkship %s in the top ten less of a big deal? Just wondering.

Side note, Cornell is doing fantastic. Small class size seems to work very well for them. And I think it should be CCNP at this point in time given Penn's numbers. Or maybe even CCP.

this post perfectly explains why even with more robust disclosure regimes, and even with dozens of law students and practicing attorneys trying to help, most 0Ls are hopeless
i thought we had turned a corner, but this thread has proven me wrong

the "fall" of harvard
cornell and penn in droves
"top ten"
new "subtiers"
the outsize influence of a subset of a subset of a subset, 0Ls completely ignoring context and other metrics
and the unfunny trolls egging them on, who are only making things worse

i've put in hundreds of hours trying to help prospective students in choosing and chances
maybe it was all a waste
maybe it's time to rethink this hobby of mine


First and foremost, outside of the typo of using "top ten" instead of "top fourteen" I didn't say any of those things.

Second, I was merely pointing out that Cornell and Penn's employment #s are much better than their USNWR ratings or perceived tiers. Yes, I am a 0L. But the very law school students and practicing attorneys who frequent this website reference rankings and tiers all the time. In fact, practicing attorneys I know and have heard from at admitted students panels and professional events have referenced them too. But they aren't speaking objectively, they're speaking to perception. As in, people perceive one school to be better than another because it's ranked higher or because its employment numbers are higher. I wasn't speaking objectively. I was speaking in reference to how people perceive tiers and ranks. Most people do not perceive Cornell to be in the same tier as Columbia, Chicago, and NYU, but their employment numbers tell a different story. Most people do not perceive Penn to be in the same tier as Columbia, Chicago, and NYU, but their employment numbers tell a different story. I wasn't suggesting one is better than others. I was merely saying that perhaps these employment numbers will change perceptions. I really didn't think I would have had to break this down...

And finally, if you think this is a waste, please move forward. 0Ls use this website as a resource and community, and forums are places for observations and insight. Your word is not the gospel or the end-all-be-all because you profess to be more knowledgeable while hiding behind a keyboard like the rest of us. If you seriously hope to help prospective students choose and chance law schools, you should become a consultant and do it in person or at least via Skype. And if you do want to respond to 0Ls on TLS, the least you could be is polite. My comment was harmless, at best.

i've never seen so much RC fail in my life
my issue is with (some of the) posters in this thread, igenerally
i picked out your post as emblematic of the problem
it's amazing you and a few other idiots somehow think my issue was with only with you, and not this thread in general

i mean really, wow

timmyd
Posts: 329
Joined: Sun Jul 14, 2013 8:50 pm

Re: Latest employment data

Postby timmyd » Wed Apr 15, 2015 5:23 pm

Pretty solid, whats the BL clerk breakdown?

timmyd
Posts: 329
Joined: Sun Jul 14, 2013 8:50 pm

Re: Latest employment data

Postby timmyd » Wed Apr 15, 2015 5:24 pm

for UT

User avatar
cannibal ox
Posts: 2944
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2013 11:49 pm

Re: Latest employment data

Postby cannibal ox » Wed Apr 15, 2015 5:26 pm

10.5% fed clerk, 35.9% biglaw for UT.

Fed clerk up from 9%, biglaw up from 33% (2013 grads).

User avatar
runinthefront
Posts: 1105
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2014 2:18 am

Re: Latest employment data

Postby runinthefront » Wed Apr 15, 2015 5:29 pm

Brut wrote:i've never seen so much RC fail in my life
my issue is with (some of the) posters in this thread, igenerally
i picked out your post as emblematic of the problem
it's amazing you and a few other idiots somehow think my issue was with only with you, and not this thread in general

i mean really, wow


Don't go back to Bruno Mars Brut

please

New Brut >>>>>>> Bruno Mars Brut

The name-calling is so...extra

wsag826
Posts: 140
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 9:43 pm

Re: Latest employment data

Postby wsag826 » Wed Apr 15, 2015 5:30 pm

ChoboPie wrote:
wsag826 wrote:And finally, if you think this is a waste, please move forward. 0Ls use this website as a resource and community, and forums are places for observations and insight. Your word is not the gospel or the end-all-be-all because you profess to be more knowledgeable while hiding behind a keyboard like the rest of us. If you seriously hope to help prospective students choose and chance law schools, you should become a consultant and do it in person or at least via Skype. And if you do want to respond to 0Ls on TLS, the least you could be is polite. My comment was harmless, at best.


But your comment wasn't "harmless, at best."

wsag826 wrote:Side note, Cornell is doing fantastic. Small class size seems to work very well for them. And I think it should be CCNP at this point in time given Penn's numbers. Or maybe even CCP.


You admit that you're a 0L, but then you claim that CCN should be changed to CCNP or CCP? What's your basis for this, besides a cursory glance at one year's worth of BL+FedClerk outcomes? You might think your comment is completely innocent, but spouting personal opinions with little basis and experience is potentially harmful to people on this forum seeking legitimate info and advice.

Also,
wsag826 wrote:If you seriously hope to help prospective students choose and chance law schools, you should become a consultant and do it in person or at least via Skype.


Seriously? Wtfareyousmoking? Besides the potential harm of misinformation, having to spend the time to read through your two long responses with such little value added to the conversation in itself was a dreadful experience.


My comment was harmless. I literally prefaced it by saying "0L here." If someone is on this forum and seeks legitimate info and advice from someone who starts their post with such a disclaimer, you should be taking it out on them...not me.

Again, I merely suggested that Penn and Cornell's employment numbers are better than their perceived ranking/tier and deserve some more recognition than usual. And yes, it was based on a cursory glance...but I don't see any harm in that. One shouldn't be required to conduct empirical and longitudinal research on BL+FC placement numbers to comment on a TLS thread.

You and Brut seem to be taking a couple comments I made on this thread (for the last time...with a clear disclaimer that I am a 0L) and blowing it up into some meltdown over 0L-propagated misinformation.

User avatar
starry eyed
Posts: 2048
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 11:26 am

Re: Latest employment data

Postby starry eyed » Wed Apr 15, 2015 5:32 pm

this forum is becoming unsafe for democracy

071816
Posts: 5511
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2011 8:06 pm

Re: Latest employment data

Postby 071816 » Wed Apr 15, 2015 5:33 pm

PLEASE STOP LITTERING THESE FORA

User avatar
sesto elemento
Posts: 1535
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2014 7:29 pm

Re: Latest employment data

Postby sesto elemento » Wed Apr 15, 2015 5:36 pm

To the 0L's who are just now interacting with veteran TLS posters

Image

HalfStudent
Posts: 128
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2014 1:21 pm

Re: Latest employment data

Postby HalfStudent » Wed Apr 15, 2015 5:38 pm

BrazilBandit wrote:Law school funded basically doubled...



Most schools did it for US news ranking rigging but still 2014 did slightly better than 2013.

03152016
Posts: 9189
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 3:14 am

Re: Latest employment data

Postby 03152016 » Wed Apr 15, 2015 5:39 pm

runinthefront wrote:
Brut wrote:i've never seen so much RC fail in my life
my issue is with (some of the) posters in this thread, igenerally
i picked out your post as emblematic of the problem
it's amazing you and a few other idiots somehow think my issue was with only with you, and not this thread in general

i mean really, wow


Don't go back to Bruno Mars Brut

please

New Brut >>>>>>> Bruno Mars Brut

The name-calling is so...extra

i'd be happy to discuss my post/argument itt, but discussions like this one belong in off-topics or PMs. so i won't respond other than to say that, contrary to your earlier accusation, i am certainly not alting. i can argue perfectly well without sockpuppeting, believe me.

Moneytrees
Posts: 646
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2014 11:41 pm

Re: Latest employment data

Postby Moneytrees » Wed Apr 15, 2015 5:44 pm

Brut wrote:
runinthefront wrote:
Brut wrote:i've never seen so much RC fail in my life
my issue is with (some of the) posters in this thread, igenerally
i picked out your post as emblematic of the problem
it's amazing you and a few other idiots somehow think my issue was with only with you, and not this thread in general

i mean really, wow


Don't go back to Bruno Mars Brut

please

New Brut >>>>>>> Bruno Mars Brut

The name-calling is so...extra

i'd be happy to discuss my post/argument itt, but discussions like this one belong in off-topics or PMs. so i won't respond other than to say that, contrary to your earlier accusation, i am certainly not alting. i can argue perfectly well without sockpuppeting, believe me.


Your "argument" thus far has consisted of needlessly berating somebody for daring to mention Penn in the same breath as NYU.

03152016
Posts: 9189
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 3:14 am

Re: Latest employment data

Postby 03152016 » Wed Apr 15, 2015 5:45 pm

Moneytrees wrote:
Brut wrote:
runinthefront wrote:
Brut wrote:i've never seen so much RC fail in my life
my issue is with (some of the) posters in this thread, igenerally
i picked out your post as emblematic of the problem
it's amazing you and a few other idiots somehow think my issue was with only with you, and not this thread in general

i mean really, wow


Don't go back to Bruno Mars Brut

please

New Brut >>>>>>> Bruno Mars Brut

The name-calling is so...extra

i'd be happy to discuss my post/argument itt, but discussions like this one belong in off-topics or PMs. so i won't respond other than to say that, contrary to your earlier accusation, i am certainly not alting. i can argue perfectly well without sockpuppeting, believe me.


You "argument" thus far has consisted of needlessly berating somebody for daring to mention Penn in the same breath as NYU.

if that was your takeaway from all of my previous posts itt, you're even more hopeless than i thought

User avatar
Rigo
Posts: 11953
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 3:19 pm

Re: Latest employment data

Postby Rigo » Wed Apr 15, 2015 5:46 pm

Era of nice brut
Welcome back.

User avatar
cannibal ox
Posts: 2944
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2013 11:49 pm

Re: Latest employment data

Postby cannibal ox » Wed Apr 15, 2015 5:46 pm

Oh my god shut up.

User avatar
zombie mcavoy
Posts: 428
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2015 10:11 pm

Re: Latest employment data

Postby zombie mcavoy » Wed Apr 15, 2015 5:47 pm

Y'all are ruining UT's moment of glory!

Mal Reynolds
Posts: 12630
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 12:16 am

Re: Latest employment data

Postby Mal Reynolds » Wed Apr 15, 2015 5:47 pm

I don't understand how brut thinks he's being productive around here. He's just as bas as the people he argues with.

User avatar
cannibal ox
Posts: 2944
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2013 11:49 pm

Re: Latest employment data

Postby cannibal ox » Wed Apr 15, 2015 5:48 pm

zombie mcavoy wrote:Y'all are ruining UT's moment of glory!


And Michigan/GULC's moment of shame.

03152016
Posts: 9189
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 3:14 am

Re: Latest employment data

Postby 03152016 » Wed Apr 15, 2015 5:48 pm

Moneytrees wrote:
Rigo wrote:
Clemenceau wrote:
rion91 wrote:damn bu and notre dame are killin it

Other law schools should be taking notes wrt class sizes

Huh? BU class size is about the same and ND grew their's.


BU has decreased its class size substantially (class of 2017 will graduate 210 students as opposed to 2013's class of 275) , and ND only grew their size to 200, which is fine for a good regional. I'm sure ND's class of 2018 will will drop back to the 180 or 190 range.

strongly disagree with this entire post
it makes assertions about future class sizes that are completely speculative
proclaiming a class size of 200 is "fine for a good regional", which is inane, because class size should be based on regional demand for fresh JDs, not some arbitrary cut-off
not value-adding whatsoever

User avatar
BrazilBandit
Posts: 297
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2014 8:33 pm

Re: Latest employment data

Postby BrazilBandit » Wed Apr 15, 2015 5:52 pm

Spreadsheet for the "Tier 1" (really hoping I don't get attacked for being a 0L and referring to a tier) is now complete! time to get ready for them medians...

Moneytrees
Posts: 646
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2014 11:41 pm

Re: Latest employment data

Postby Moneytrees » Wed Apr 15, 2015 5:52 pm

ND's classes have consistently been between 160 and 180. There's no reason to believe that last year's class size is going to be the new normal for them.

http://www.lstscorereports.com/schools/notredame/2013/

"Fine" was meant in the sense that it's a reasonable class size to have for a good regional. It's not ideal, but it's not a travesty either.

03152016
Posts: 9189
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 3:14 am

Re: Latest employment data

Postby 03152016 » Wed Apr 15, 2015 5:54 pm

Moneytrees wrote:T17 makes more sense than T18, but neither is particularly useful. You have the top schools and then you have the good regionals. Vanderbilt, UCLA and UT are perhaps somewhere in between those two categories; WUSTL isn't. Though it deserves credit for being generous in its merit aid policy.

flat wrong, completely incorrect. t17 in no way makes more sense than t18.
there is nothing that suggests UCLA has more national reach than WUSTL. both are regionals, and equally so
if anything, UCLA grads are much more likely to work in CA, than WUSTL grads in IL/MO

Moneytrees
Posts: 646
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2014 11:41 pm

Re: Latest employment data

Postby Moneytrees » Wed Apr 15, 2015 5:58 pm

Brut wrote:
Moneytrees wrote:T17 makes more sense than T18, but neither is particularly useful. You have the top schools and then you have the good regionals. Vanderbilt, UCLA and UT are perhaps somewhere in between those two categories; WUSTL isn't. Though it deserves credit for being generous in its merit aid policy.

flat wrong, completely incorrect. t17 in no way makes more sense than t18.
there is nothing that suggests UCLA has more national reach than WUSTL. both are regionals, and equally so
if anything, UCLA grads are much more likely to work in CA, than WUSTL grads in IL/MO


Reading comprehension. I never said UCLA has a more national reach. Vandy, UCLA and UT have employment outcomes that are somewhere between those of the T14 and those of the good regional schools. Those schools are a notch ahead of WUSTL, if we go purely by the employment data that we have.

03152016
Posts: 9189
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 3:14 am

Re: Latest employment data

Postby 03152016 » Wed Apr 15, 2015 5:59 pm

Moneytrees wrote:
BigZuck wrote:
banjo wrote:Columbia's NLJ250 rate--which underreports BL placement and doesn't include clerkships--was 66%, topping the list. CLS is obviously going to end up in the 70s. They're probably just delayed because they have their mega EIP info session for the 1Ls this week.

If it means anything, UT's NLJ250 rate is just ever so slightly higher this year than last, so I'm guessing numbers will be about the same, just like the dean apparently said.

Maybe clerkships were worse though? I dunno.

Clerkships were down for Georgetown and Vandy, so it's possible.

no.
clerkship placement for gulc and vandy would have almost nothing to do with placement for UT
in fact, in the same timeframe that gulc decreased in fedclerk from 2011 to 2013, UT increased in fedclerk (compare 2011 to 2013 data on lstscorereports.com)
just because the two are ranked closely and often compared does not translate into any impact re: fedclerk placement




Return to “Law School Admissions Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 6 guests